Posts Tagged ‘Climate change’

Virginia lawmakers act on energy bills

Monday, February 23rd, 2015 - posted by hannah
There has been no shortage of activity on energy policy during Virginia’s 2015 legislative session.

There has been no shortage of activity on energy policy during Virginia’s 2015 legislative session.

As the Virginia General Assembly enters the final days of its 2015 session, we can look back on five intense weeks.

Among the many issues our lawmakers labored over, a few were explosive enough to consistently make headlines. Energy policy was one of those issues thanks largely to electric utilities’ efforts to capitalize on worries about upcoming federal rules on carbon pollution.

Here’s a recap of the drama, along with a few important policies that received less fanfare.

>> First, a measure that shocked newspaper editorial boards, dismayed consumer groups, and stunned many of us who have challenged the utilities’ business-as-usual plans, but passed the legislature easily: under SB 1349, Virginia would see a five-year period when state regulators do not review rates set by Dominion Power and Appalachian Power, likely preventing any refunds of utility over-earnings to customers. The base portion of rates will be fixed, but other charges related to fuel costs can still rise during the period.

Political dynamics and election sensitivities made this legislation especially charged, and ultimately some of our top legislative champions for advancing clean energy stepped in and saw to it that the measure includes a designation for up to 500 megawatts of solar energy to be in the public interest, thereby authorizing state regulators to approve large scale solar farms — of which there are exactly zero in Virginia right now. The champs also added provisions for utilities to pay for low-income home weatherization programs.

Gov. McAuliffe signed the bill into law on Tuesday.

>> Last Wednesday, legislation passed both houses capping Virginia’s coal production and employment tax credits at $7.5 million annually. Appalachian Voices and other advocates have called for comprehensive study of whether such credits have their intended effects, including sustaining coal-related jobs in Southwest Virginia. A study by Downstream Strategies a few years ago suggests they do not. SB 741, which originally extended the tax credits by five years, is expected to come out of conference committee this week extending the credits for only two years while analysis is done by a reform-oriented panel.

>> On to one enormous highlight of the session: several bills containing extreme language against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed Clean Power Plan — aimed at reducing carbon pollution from power plants — never made it out of committee. One was an effort to empower the General Assembly to sue the EPA. Another bill that is still alive directs the state Department of Environmental Quality to consider concerns and take the input of legislators, and requires the General Assembly to express its approval of DEQ’s compliance plan in the form of a resolution.

>> Lastly, a bill based on a central concept of Gov. McAuliffe’s Energy Plan creates a Solar Energy Development Authority for Virginia. In spite of some legislators’ concerns about growing government, the promise of boosting job growth in the solar industry propelled this measure through both houses. A net energy metering expansion bill also still stands a good chance of passing.

With some great concepts like the Virginia Coastal Protection Act unable to find sufficient support in committee to pass this year, the work to pave the way for next year’s legislative efforts lies before us. Citizen contact with delegates and senators can continue year-round, and there are many ways to stay engage.

In addition to calling or writing your elected officials, enrolling in an energy-efficiency program offered by your power company or going solar sends a clear signal to our legislators about Virginia residents’ preferences and expectations on important energy policy issues.

“Clean coal” is on the fritz

Wednesday, February 18th, 2015 - posted by brian

By Brian Sewell

Cost overruns and construction delays are dampening enthusiasm for carbon capture and storage technologies

A rendering of FutureGen 2.0. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Energy pulled its funding from the project, which was intended to demonstrate the feasibility of carbon capture and storage technology on a commercial-scale. Credit Department of Energy.

A rendering of FutureGen 2.0. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Energy pulled its funding from the project, which was intended to demonstrate the feasibility of carbon capture and storage technology on a commercial-scale. Credit Department of Energy.

As one of the most high-profile and hyped-up projects of its kind, the FutureGen “clean coal” plant in Illinois was supposed make history. Its backers saw in it the key to unlocking an inherently dirty energy source’s promise in a world coming to grips with climate change.

So the announcement earlier this month that the U.S. Department of Energy is backing out of its $1.1 billion funding commitment to the FutureGen project, citing a desire to “protect taxpayer interests,” sent a shockwave through the coal sector and investors, energy analysts and environmentalists all took note.

But the news that “clean coal” technology has taken yet another hit should not come as a surprise. Even with $6 billion in commitments under the Obama administration, carbon capture projects just don’t have the track record needed to pique private investors’ interest.

Every form of carbon capture technology comes with technical and technological drawbacks that translate to enormous costs. A commercial-scale “clean coal” plant using even the most advanced technologies may increase the cost of electricity by up to 80 percent, according to DOE. These challenges make commercial-scale carbon capture projects outcasts when it comes to competitive energy markets, where traditional fossil fuel plants and, increasingly, large-scale and distributed renewable projects represent the most cost-effective power sources.

Convinced that coal will remain one of the nation’s foremost energy sources for decades to come, DOE will put billions more into advancing “clean coal” technology, attempting to overcome its economic pitfalls and keep burning the dirtiest fuel around.

FutureGen’s Downfall

FutureGen 2.0 planned to transport CO2 waste approximately 30 miles  through pipelines before being injected in deep saline formations.

FutureGen 2.0 planned to transport CO2 waste approximately 30 miles through pipelines before being injected in deep saline formations. Click to enlarge.

The idea for FutureGen arose in 2003 under the Bush administration. The plan was for the FutureGen Industrial Alliance, a coalition of mining and energy companies including Alpha Natural Resources and Peabody Energy, to oversee retrofits to an existing coal plant and, in the process, prove the feasibility of burning coal, then capturing and storing the carbon emitted underground.

But the project soon began suffering from the delays, cost overruns and other challenges that will be its legacy. FutureGen was canceled, for the first time, in 2008 before construction could begin.

In 2010, the Obama administration used stimulus money to give FutureGen new life as FutureGen 2.0, a smaller proposed plant that would use a different technology to capture its emissions, but still show how carbon capture could make a more climate-friendly coal plant. For a time, everything seemed to be going in FutureGen’s favor. But then familiar cracks started to appear.

The Illinois Commerce Commission approved a controversial plan in 2012 to require utilities, and therefore their customers, to buy all the electricity generated by the FutureGen plant for 20 years — likely at dramatically over-market rates. The decision may have reassured some private investors, but challenges to the decision by the utilities themselves were headed to the Illinois Supreme Court.

The Sierra Club challenged the air pollution permit granted to FutureGen by the Illinois Pollution Control Board, saying the State of Illinois should hold FutureGen to its promise to build a “near-zero emissions” plant. FutureGen needed to convert a World War II-era boiler at the plant to one compatible with the oxy-combustion technology it planned use to capture its emissions. The Sierra Club argued that allowing FutureGen to convert the boiler would violate the federal Clean Air Act unless it obtained the appropriate permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

All of this is to say that the DOE isn’t entirely, or even mostly, responsible for FutureGen’s failure. Unresolved legal battles, environmental and economic concerns all combined to hurt the chances of attracting enough private investment to bring the $1.65 billion project online. It became clear that the project could not be completed by September 2015, the deadline for federal funds to be spent under the 2009 stimulus, so DOE pulled the plug.

According to DOE, approximately $116.5 million of the total award had been invested in the plant since 2010.

The Sierra Club, which has called FutureGen a boondoggle from the very beginning, said the news reflects a national trend toward embracing clean energy.

“This project has gone through a decade of false starts and with today’s announcement, $1 billion in federal funding and hundreds of thousands of dollars in Illinois ratepayer financing can be freed up for investment in clean energy,” Holly Bender, Deputy Director of the Sierra Club Beyond Coal campaign, said in a statement.

Coal industry groups directed their frustrations toward the Obama administration and mostly overlooked the host of other challenges facing FutureGen.

Hal Quinn, president of the National Mining Association, said in a statement that DOE’s decision to end funding for FutureGen “cannot be reconciled with the [Obama] administration’s proposal to require CCS as the only acceptable technology for any new coal-fueled power plant in the U.S.”

Proceed with Caution

A "first-of-its-kind" technologically speaking and the most expensive coal plant of all time, Mississippi Power's Kemper Plant has put ratepayers at risk in search of unproven and far-off returns. Photo from Wikipedia.

A “first-of-its-kind” technologically speaking and the most expensive coal plant of all time, Mississippi Power’s Kemper Plant has put ratepayers at risk in pursuit of unproven and far-off returns. Photo from Wikipedia.

Carbon capture is a must if future U.S. coal plants — if there is such a thing — hope to meet regulations on greenhouse gases being developed under the Clean Air Act.

Analysts say the only way to create a market for carbon capture technology, at least one that would attract significant private capital, is by capping power plant pollution. But groups like the National Mining Association lambast the president and the U.S Environmental Protection Agency for pursuing policies that will limit carbon pollution from power plants and steer investments toward alternative forms of energy, including “clean coal.”

Even with a strong climate policy, some experts doubt commercial-scale “clean coal” projects will be around in time to make a meaningful contribution to reducing carbon pollution. Sean Casten, the president and CEO of Recycled Energy Development, recently drew the comparison between the likelihood of the technology’s success and the existence of unicorns.

“I suppose it’s possible that there will suddenly be a huge pot of capital willing to invest billions of dollars in an unproven technology with long construction times and regulatory-dependent cash flows,” Casten told SNL Energy. “But unicorns are more likely.”

Another notable casualty is Tenaska’s $3.5-billion Taylorsville, Ill., plant, which the Nebraska-based energy developer canceled in 2013. The company cited market conditions that led it to focus on developing natural gas and renewable energy facilities instead. But the fact that Illinois lawmakers would not agree to a 30-year contract to buy electricity from the plant, and pass those high costs on to ratepayers, had something to do with it.

With the Taylorsville plant and FutureGen off the table, the U.S. is left with one utility-scale carbon capture project currently under construction. But Mississippi Power’s Kemper Plant, which received a $270 million grant from DOE, is like the projects before it: more of a cautionary tale than a positive sign for coal’s future.

Cost increases have been like clockwork at Kemper. Initially estimated to cost $2.2 billion, the price to build the plant has ballooned to $6.17 billion since 2009, making it the most expensive coal plant in U.S. history. Southern Company, the parent company of Mississippi Power, announced a $45 million increase this month.

$6 billion and counting: Cost increases at the Kemper Plant have been like clockwork since 2009.

$6 billion and counting: Cost increases at the Kemper Plant have been like clockwork since 2009. Graphic by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

To help pay the bill, the Mississippi Public Utilities Commission approved an 18 percent rate hike on Mississippi Power in March 2013, and the company says it’s likely to seek another increase of at least 4 percent to help pay off $1 billion in bonds that the state legislature is allowing it to issue.

“This is the largest rate increase in the state of Mississippi’s history, and this is the largest transfer of wealth from the people to a corporation in the state of Mississippi’s history,” Public Service Commissioner Brandon Presley told Mississippi Watchdog in 2013.

Presley was the only dissenting vote when the commission approved the rate increase. But now the state’s highest court is on his side. Last week, the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the rate increase after finding the utilities commission hadn’t ruled on the “prudency” of the Kemper Plant’s growing cost. The court directed Mississippi Power to refund ratepayers about $271 million attributed to the rate increase.

The Kemper plant is slated to open in mid-2016, more than two years behind schedule.

The quest to create a cleaner future for coal increasingly rests on the question of how much we’re willing pay for it.

Appalachian Voices Book Club

Wednesday, February 18th, 2015 - posted by allison

Appalachia’s triumphs and tragedies, its beauty and mystery, and its people’s tenacity, love and good humor have long been enshrined in fiction. This year, stories of the region’s struggles with coal are reaching a national audience thanks to John Grisham’s bestselling “Gray Mountain,” a legal thriller that pits a small but dedicated team of individuals against a rapacious coal industry. Also spreading awareness, the debut novel from Christopher Scotton weaves the impacts of mountaintop removal mining into a poignant story of humanity and healing.

Across the region, writers are offering brilliant new work of all stripes, including several don’t-miss endeavors reviewed here. We also take a look at the many ways regional writers are taking advantage of the freedoms afforded by the self-publishing movement.

To find more of the best recent writing on Appalachia, we suggest a visit to your local librarian!

Gray Mountain by John Grisham
GirlsAtomicCity
Turning_Carolina_Red-1

Virginia Climate Fever

Wednesday, February 18th, 2015 - posted by molly

How Global Warming Will Transform Our Cities, Shorelines, and Forests

By Stephen Nash

VA-climate-fever

As visiting senior research scholar at the University of Richmond, Stephen Nash explores the stunning local aspects of climate disruption. This digestible work employs enough facts and visuals to demonstrate the amount of damage that global warming promises for the Old Dominion.

Nash, a journalist, takes the reader with him as he travels around Virginia, talking with scientists, citizens, officials and business people. Through these encounters, Nash reveals that our temperature averages will gradually rise during the next hundred years, essentially turning Virginia into present-day Alabama. Graphs show increasing numbers of days with temperatures surpassing 90 degrees, with drastic consequences for life-forms from trees to fish, and to both rural and city-dwelling humans.

Nash’s most compelling passages deal with sea level rise and the increasingly formidable threat of property destruction in the Hampton Roads region. This trend could result in climate refugees as limited financial resources cover only the costs of protecting high-value infrastructure and leave homeowners behind.

Throughout the book, Nash compares two scenarios of human response to global warming, labeled “business as usual” and “work and hope,” while maintaining that Virginians are not entirely the masters of their fate because global warming is a problem that requires a global response.

This book is fact-based and never overstated, making it mandatory reading for Virginians seeking a primer on a complex topic. — Review by Hannah Wiegard, Appalachian Voices Virginia Campaign Coordinator

WV Repeals Changes to Climate Science Standards

Tuesday, February 17th, 2015 - posted by Dac Collins

By Chris Robey

Following a heated public rebuke, the West Virginia Board of Education reversed its decision to alter newly proposed national K-12 science education standards. The board’s alterations would have required West Virginia teachers to frame human-caused climate change as a debate rather than an accepted body of evidence.

Teachers and environmental groups denounced the alterations as an attempt to undermine peer-reviewed evidence of climate change.

The newly restored standards will be open for public comment until mid-February. In March, the board will vote on final standards for the 2016-17 school year. If adopted, the standards will mark the first time West Virginia students are required to study evidence supporting human-caused climate change.

The reversal comes just days after the conservation group, Friends of the Blackwater, released a report highlighting rising temperatures in the state’s Allegheny Highlands region. View the report, titled “On the Chopping Block,” at alleghenyclimate.org

White House moves to regulate methane emissions

Monday, February 16th, 2015 - posted by Kimber

By Brian Sewell

After years of scientific research pointing to methane’s outsized contribution to climate change, the Obama administration will use its executive power to regulate emissions of the potent greenhouse gas from oil and gas productions and pipelines.

In addition to developing the first-ever regulations to limit methane emissions, the White House described a set of actions it will take beginning this year to achieve a reduction in overall U.S. emissions by up to 45 percent by 2025. Without action, methane emissions are expected to rise dramatically over the next decade.

Several federal agencies will be involved, officials say, each targeting different aspects of the oil and gas industry. The Bureau of Land Management, for example, will update outdated standards to reduce wasteful flaring of natural gas, which is primarily methane, from oil and gas wells on public lands. And the Department of Transportation will propose new natural gas pipeline safety standards that are expected to lower methane leaked during transport.

Presented as the most significant step the White House has taken to address climate change since releasing rules to limit carbon dioxide, the rules were nonetheless met with some doubt by environmentalists. They apply only to new and modified oil and gas systems and will mostly rely on voluntary efforts from oil and gas companies.

But, under the Clean Air Act, once rules are developed targeting future sources of a specific pollutant, the EPA is legally obligated to issue rules to cut emissions from existing facilities spewing that pollutant too.

Oil and gas companies argue their financial motivation to reduce leaks eliminates the need for regulation. But energy analysts say contractors and smaller companies along the supply chain who don’t actually own the gas lack incentive to invest in better equipment and monitoring.

The escaped gas represents more than just lost profits. Methane is a major contributor to global climate change and is the second most prevalent greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide.

Methane makes up 9 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, about one-third of which comes from oil and gas production. Although its lifespan in the atmosphere is much shorter than that of carbon dioxide, methane’s contribution to climate change is 25 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 100-year period.

Getting methane emissions in check could be more urgent than previously thought. A 2014 study published in Science warned that methane may be leaking from oil and natural gas drilling sites and pipelines at rates 50 percent higher than official EPA estimates.

Energy and Environment Star in First Act of New Congress

Monday, February 16th, 2015 - posted by molly

By Molly Moore

The 114th Congress had barely opened its doors when the subject of climate change rolled up to Capitol Hill, unpacked its suitcase, and settled in for what appears to be a long stay in federal politics this year.

“The best scientists in the world are all telling us that our activities are changing the climate,” President Barack Obama said during his State of the Union address. This summer the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will move forward on a key element of the president’s climate change plan by finalizing the first limits on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. In the fall, world leaders will gather for the potentially pivotal United Nations climate summit in Paris.

The first bill introduced during Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s term, the Keystone XL Pipeline Act, would expedite the approval of the hotly contested pipeline and allow Canadian company TransCanada to send tar sands oil through America to the Gulf Coast. During the debate over the bill, which passed the Senate and received a veto threat from President Obama, senators submitted 247 amendments — mostly about environment and energy — and held roll call votes for 42 of them.

Among these votes were three statements on climate change. The Senate overwhelmingly passed a measure acknowledging that climate change is real, but one amendment affirming that human activities contribute and another suggesting that the United States should change its energy policy to reduce climate change both failed to achieve a 60-vote majority.

But the vast majority of the amendments proposed during the Keystone debate never saw a vote, and were likely written as signals to various agencies, industries and other groups that the Senate is interested in those topics.

One amendment introduced by Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.), was designed to prevent the Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement from completing their rewrite of the Stream Protection Rule, a regulation that limits mine waste in waterways. Even though senators did not vote on the amendment, it sends a clear message that Congress is likely to stay involved in the workings of federal agencies.

Survey says: Virginians want clean energy

Tuesday, February 3rd, 2015 - posted by cat
While legislators in Richmond bow to Dominion, voters increasingly demand a clean energy economy.

While legislators in Richmond bow to Dominion, voters increasingly demand a clean energy economy.

An overwhelming majority of Virginians say they want the state to develop a plan that reduces carbon pollution and increases cleaner sources of energy that will help create jobs and boost the economy, according to a poll released today.

It’s good news, and it confirms what we hear almost every day in our conversations with citizens of the commonwealth. It also aligns with a growing body of public opinion research ­— Americans increasingly understand that carbon pollution harms our health and environment and is causing global warming. They also get that shifting to clean energy sources will yield not only environmental protection, but also tremendous economic benefits.

Today’s poll was conducted jointly by two national firms — one Democratic and one Republican — for the Natural Resources Defense Council. Four hundred Virginia voters were surveyed during the second week of January, just as the General Assembly was mired in a slew of industry-backed bills that would thwart efforts to move Virginia toward cleaner energy. (It never ceases to amaze how tone-deaf legislators can be when it comes to the vox populi on environmental issues.)

A few more highlights from the poll, but it’s worth taking a look at the summary:

64% of Virginians support the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s “Clean Power Plan” to reduce carbon pollution from existing power plants.
83% want Virginia in the driver’s seat in developing ways to meet EPA’s goals. Support in the Roanoke/Lynchburg area (the western-most area that was polled) is 79%.
95% of all Virginians support increased energy efficiency to meet our future needs.
88% support boosting the state’s use of renewable power, including wind and solar.
Hannah Wiegard, our Virginia Campaign Coordinator, is in Richmond today, joining our allies to ensure that our elected officials see these results as they consider key legislation.

West Virginia flunks climate change class

Wednesday, January 7th, 2015 - posted by cat

climate change on blackboard The Board of Education in West Virginia may be on to something when it comes to the thorny problem of worldwide climate change: Scrub it for the K-12 curriculum.

Last fall, the board was set to adopt new science-teaching standards based on a national blueprint of voluntary and internationally-recognized benchmarks, developed by 26 states in conjunction with such tree-hugger bastions as the National Research Council, National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The standards require students to learn about the evidence for human-driven climate change.

But in December, as reported by Ryan Quinn of the Charleston Gazette, the board changed the standards to more or less eliminate references to human causes of climate change — to whit, the burning of fossil fuels — largely at the behest of a board member. Quinn reported that Wade Linger doesn’t believe human-driven global warming is a “foregone conclusion.”

Quinn also noted:

State school board member Tom Campbell said that in response to the climate change language, Linger brought up concerns about political views being taught in classrooms during an open school board meeting in Mingo County in November. Campbell said he shared those concerns.
“Let’s not use unproven theories,” said Campbell, a former House of Delegates education chairman. “Let’s stick to the facts.”

Technically all theories could be considered unproven — many, like the theory of gravitation or plate tectonics, are overwhelmingly accepted by both scientists and the public based on a bevy of evidence. Even other publicly controversial ones, like evolution, are still overwhelmingly accepted by scientists.

When asked why climate change was the particular “unproven science” that he and Linger were concerned about, Campbell responded that “West Virginia coal in particular has been taking on unfair negativity from certain groups.” He also noted the coal industry provides much money to the state’s education system.

The two board members might have been reading from a page in The Heartland Institute’s playbook. In 2012, the national conservative think-tank was cooking up plans to create a curriculum promoting the idea that the human role in contributing to climate change is “a major scientific controversy” (notwithstanding that some 97 percent of climate scientists agree that the climate is changing and that human activity is a significant cause).

The West Virginia Board of Education’s action has precipitated quite the kerfuffle in the Mountain State. Groups who oppose the changes to the science standard are now speaking out, and have started a petition to compel the board to rescind the changes.

“When it comes to the accuracy of peer-reviewed science, it is important to teach actual science and not theories that are based on the politics of the coal industry,” said Lisa Hoyos — director and co-founder of Climate Parents, a national nonprofit with members in all 50 states, including 200 in West Virginia. Hoyos said group members would be attending future meetings of the education board.

Photo by BigStockPhoto.com

Exposed: Linking Human Health and the Environment

Friday, December 19th, 2014 - posted by allison
TVA-coalash-2

The dam holding more than one billion gallons of coal ash waste at Tennessee Valley Authority’s Kingston Fossil coal-fired power plant collapsed on Dec. 22, 2008. Photo courtesy of Appalachian Voices

As an assortment of pollutants leach into our lives, the harmful effects continue to surface in public health. Yet many questions about environmental contaminants remain difficult to study, such as long-term health effects of low-level exposure, and how these different chemicals interact in the environment.

At every stage in the life-cycle of fossil fuels — mining or drilling, transportation, processing and use — toxic waste contaminates land, air and water. And at the same time that pesticides have allowed food production to expand, these same poisonous chemicals may affect every life form on Earth, from bacteria to humans.

By Kimber Ray

icon-fracking

FRACKING

The last decade has seen a rapid expansion of the drilling method known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. Sand and chemicals — including known carcinogens — are mixed with water and injected deep underground to extract natural gas from shale rock formations. Yet many chemicals remain unknown because companies may claim them as trade secrets… [Full Story]
icon-smoke

PESTICIDES

Whether in food, water or air, current research suggests that no corner of the global environment is spared from pesticide contamination — not even the bacteria and fungi needed to regenerate soil. Pesticides include popular products such as insecticides, herbicides, fungicides and rodenticides. Many properties and impacts of these chemicals remain unstudied…[Full Story]
icon-mtn

MOUNTAINTOP REMOVAL COAL MINING

Nearly 650 mountaintop removal coal mining sites scar the landscape of central Appalachia. Neighboring communities experience greater levels of air and water pollution and suffer from higher rates of illness than similar communities located further away, says Dr. Michael Hendryx, a professor of applied health science at Indiana University who has contributed to more than 30 studies on the subject…[Full Story]
icon-bug

CLIMATE CHANGE

Much of Appalachia is predicted to experience increased temperatures and precipitation over the coming decades, with temperatures rising by four to nine degrees Fahrenheit and fewer — but more intense — storms interspersed with short droughts…[Full Story]
icon-plant

COAL COMBUSTION

Coal is currently the largest source of global energy. When coal is burned, its carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, sulfur, nitrogen and trace metals combine to form greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrogen oxides. Other emissions include sulfur dioxide gas, which can contribute to acid rain and respiratory diseases, particulate matter, which can cause lung and heart disease and mercury gas, a neurotoxin…[Full Story]